lawfulcactus

> Tax breaks. The Post Office is exempt from state and local property and real estate taxes, along with other burdens like tolls, vehicle registration fees, and parking tickets. These exemptions save the USPS $2.18 billion per year.

> Cheap borrowing. [...] It currently borrows the legal limit of $15.2 billion at a rate of 1.2%. Without this access, it would be paying somewhere between $415 million and $490 million per year more in interest.

> Finally, Shapiro points out that the USPS pays its workers salaries and benefits far above the rates paid to similar workers in the private sector.

From the article; it's not a /literal/ taxpayer-funded subsidy.

> A medallion signature guarantee is a guarantee by the transferring financial institution that the signature is genuine and the financial institution accepts liability for any forgery.

Something that Mozilla is also doing[0], albeit with significantly more attention paid to the privacy-minded patches to Firefox made by the Tor Project. The end goal is to mainline these patches, such that Firefox gains the same privacy properties as the former-- they're working with the Tor team on this. If I wanted to use Firefox to access the Tor network, I'd just start a client locally and have the browser proxy traffic through it. Tor Browser's anti-fingerprinting measures are half the reason it's useful.

It's half-baked "features" like this that turn me away from Brave; there's this feeling that it's marketed towards the sort of well-meaning crowd that won't know the difference between "Tor tabs" and Tor Browser. This isn't a bad thing; rather, it's the misleading material surrounding such features published by the developers. Just look at the relevant page[1]; there's just a vague mention near the end of the article about using Tor Browser if you need "leakproof privacy", and the rest of the page carefully tiptoes around the fact that this really only prevents websites from knowing your IP address (and likely not even that, considering the similar fingerprinting properties of normal tabs and Tor tabs).

Excerpt:

"Also, web destinations can no longer easily identify or track a user arriving via Brave’s Private Tabs with Tor by means of their IP address."

To non-technical users, this reads more like "Brave (with Tor tabs) prevents websites from knowing who you are". It's lawyer-y, if that makes sense-- the whole thing just rubs me the wrong way. This is, of course, assuming said users even read the linked post; most will probably see 'Tor' and draw the relevant conclusions.

> even if the browser does not implement some of the anti-fingerprinting measures that Tor browser does

It's laughably easy to fingerprint Brave browser users, even compared to Firefox and its rather basic fingerprinting protections (at the moment). Though this is likely because Brave has a far smaller userbase.